maharg v m&S

[FlamingParrot]

Re: maharg v m&S

Hi Flaming Parrot,
what is the best procedure to ask for an extension.
I gave them 7 days to reply to my CPR 31.14 request which they have just ignored.
If I send another letter asking for an extension this just eats into my 19 days and again would probably just be ignored.
Do I email or phone them and if they agree to an extension how do I make sure the court is aware.

You can ring them and tell them that, since you are a litigant in person and they have not complied within 7 days, you'll need more time to submit your defence. You are entitled to an extension of up to 28 days under CPR rule 15.5:

Agreement extending the period for filing a defence
15.5
(1) The defendant and the claimant may agree that the period for filing a defence specified in rule 15.4 shall be extended by up to 28 days.

(2) Where the defendant and the claimant agree to extend the period for filing a defence, the defendant must notify the court in writing.

Get them to put their agreement in writing so you can then notify the court. You've still got time, a lot can happen in 19 days so there's no need to panic and rush with an N244. :nono:

[mahargrisch]

Re: maharg v m&S

If they don't respond to your CPR31.14 request, you should contact the solicitors and get them to agree to an extension of time in the first instance. If they refuse, you can go on to apply for an order using the N244, but it looks like you are skipping a step here. :noidea:

They are wrong in saying that the N244 is just to set aside judgment, in fact it's a general application form that has many uses.

You may want to look at this thread for more info about the orders.

Hi Flaming Parrot,
what is the best procedure to ask for an extension.
I gave them 7 days to reply to my CPR 31.14 request which they have just ignored.
If I send another letter asking for an extension this just eats into my 19 days and again would probably just be ignored.
Do I email or phone them and if they agree to an extension how do I make sure the court is aware.

[FlamingParrot]

Re: maharg v m&S

You may find some of the comments on this thread, useful. The OP also has an M&S storecard turned credit card and there are comments from PT: http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...%24quanda%A3ot

yep this is a storecard agreement in the claim but they have quoted the credit card number

Same as on the thread above, where the OP has been supplied an agreement for a storecard, simply because there was never an agreement for a credit card. :grin:

[mahargrisch]

Re: maharg v m&S

Hi Golden Retriever,
yep this is a storecard agreement in the claim but they have quoted the credit card number

[FlamingParrot]

Re: maharg v m&S

I have sent a recorded delivery letter based on those on other threads to the solicitors with a request under cpr 31.14 giving 7 days to send copies of the documents they are relying on in the POC so I can make my defence.

They received the letter 9 days ago and I have not had a reply.

I have prepared an Application notice N244 with a draft order requesting copy documents in their POC again according to similar threads and contacted Northampton County Court asking how to send these and pay the fees.

Helpline at NCC said that N244 is used to set aside judgment and as no judgment has been made this form is not suitable.

I explained that I am not trying to set aside judgement but want an order to make claimant to send documents in POC as without these cannot prepare a defence.

If they don't respond to your CPR31.14 request, you should contact the solicitors and get them to agree to an extension of time in the first instance. If they refuse, you can go on to apply for an order using the N244, but it looks like you are skipping a step here. :noidea:

They are wrong in saying that the N244 is just to set aside judgment, in fact it's a general application form that has many uses.

You may want to look at this thread for more info about the orders: http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/showthread.php?35511-CL-Finance-taking-me-to-court-over-loan-(ex-HSBC)-which-has-PPI-how-to-defend&p=275442#post275442

[FlamingParrot]

Re: maharg v m&S

After years of to-ing and fro-ing with m&s and various dcas,Arrow Global purchased this from m&s.
I received a Northampton CCBC claim form and using mcol acknowledged service and my intention to defend.
The POCs on the claim form state:

The claimant claims payment of the overdue balance from the Defendant under a contract between the defendant and Marks and Spencer Financial Services Ltd dated on or about xx/xx/1986 and assigned to the claimant on xx/xx/2013 in the sum of xxxx.xx
Particulars a/c no xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

The a/c no is for the &more credit card but the original application agreement cited is for the storecard.

I have PMd PT2537 :yo: who dealt with the Santander v Mayhew case which refers to a very similar card, where a storecard had been turned credit card without a new agreement. You probably know that Di Mayhew WON and Santander LOST, with co$t$ awarded against them! :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

Di Mayhew is also an LB member. :grin:

This is the case with comments from PT: http://paulatwatsonssolicitors.wordp...nder-v-mayhew/

This is the case as reported by the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17670803

[ODC]

Re: maharg v m&S

Are they referring to your store card agreement in their claim?

Im very surprised at them issuing a claim considering bigger and better DCAs have failed to do so and their are sufficient cases to show that they are unlikely to suceed

[mahargrisch]

Re: maharg v m&S

After years of to-ing and fro-ing with m&s and various dcas,Arrow Global purchased this from m&s.
I received a Northampton CCBC claim form and using mcol acknowledged service and my intention to defend.
The POCs on the claim form state:

The claimant claims payment of the overdue balance from the Defendant under a contract between the defendant and Marks and Spencer Financial Services Ltd dated on or about xx/xx/1986 and assigned to the claimant on xx/xx/2013 in the sum of xxxx.xx
Particulars a/c no xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

The a/c no is for the &more credit card but the original application agreement cited is for the storecard.

I have sent a recorded delivery letter based on those on other threads to the solicitors with a request under cpr 31.14 giving 7 days to send copies of the documents they are relying on in the POC so I can make my defence.

They received the letter 9 days ago and I have not had a reply.

I have prepared an Application notice N244 with a draft order requesting copy documents in their POC again according to similar threads and contacted Northampton County Court asking how to send these and pay the fees.

Helpline at NCC said that N244 is used to set aside judgment and as no judgment has been made this form is not suitable.

I explained that I am not trying to set aside judgement but want an order to make claimant to send documents in POC as without these cannot prepare a defence.

I have 2 questions

1. is the N244 application to ask the court to make an order for the claimant to provide the documents and once provided allow more time for defence or if not provided to request the claim be struck out the correct form
2. If it is correct can I email the form to NCCBC and how do I pay the fees

Re: maharg v m&S

Yes they should have issued a modifying agreement, it would have been interesting to see what would have happened if the earlier agreement was compliant though, would they upgrade be unenforceable in the same way or just improperly executed on the earlier agreement.

D

[ODC]

Re: maharg v m&S

indeed not a precedent, but very persuasive when added to the OFT view on this which was publicised and also the fact that Goode supports the view that what they did was wrong in upgrading from store to mastercard.

Btw, there is a missing prescribed term in the original agreeements, so they are indeed unenforceable from the outset, that is of course even if you got provided the terms and conditions in the first place.

It was admitted from memory that the application was separate from the terms and conditions, as they were set out in two separate wallets in Harrods finance hall

In plain English Paul. They are stuffed

[pt2537]

Re: maharg v m&S

Santander v Mayhew available via google. Not a precedent but persuasive.

M1

indeed not a precedent, but very persuasive when added to the OFT view on this which was publicised and also the fact that Goode supports the view that what they did was wrong in upgrading from store to mastercard.

Btw, there is a missing prescribed term in the original agreeements, so they are indeed unenforceable from the outset, that is of course even if you got provided the terms and conditions in the first place.

It was admitted from memory that the application was separate from the terms and conditions, as they were set out in two separate wallets in Harrods finance hall

[ODC]

Re: maharg v m&S

Mine went through all the standard procedures with the Leeds Losers. Threats, dire warnings, passed from Clownells Desk, to Red Debt desk via toilet to Hampton Illegal Wwith threats of Court followed by offers of huge Discount and now they are passing it on to specialist debt collectors BCW to pursue. The fools!! So I await the same series of letters from the Glasgow based muppets. Wonder if Muck Hall are no longer flavour of the month.

I this alleged debt was so valid why did the OC not take me to court, why did Red, Gothia, Iqor, Lowells, Red Debt, or Hamptons not issue summonses.

It really makes their ludicrous threats look ridiculous. Their letters are all the same that its so obvious they use the same book of so called scary threats.

Bring it on BCW

Re: maharg v m&S

Santander v Mayhew available via google. Not a precedent but persuasive.

Attached.

[ODC]

Re: maharg v m&S

I have a statement from th Leeds Losers in which they refer to the agreement dated in the late 80s. This is long before M&S issued their unsolicited Credit Cards. So thank you Mr Bartle for confirming you do not have a credit agreement

[mystery1]

Re: maharg v m&S

Santander v Mayhew available via google. Not a precedent but persuasive.

M1